.

Dear Ipso Fatso,

.

The OED defines religion as :

« A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs ».

The OED definition largely inspired the High Court of Australia’s ruling in 1983 that the beliefs, practices, and observances of the Church of the New Faith (Scientology) qualified it as a religion in Victoria.

Contrary to religion, which is a set of beliefs, atheism is a set of disbeliefs, especially as regards :

• a supreme being or beings

• a human soul

Beliefs are subjective. They are simply ideas. Whereas reality is “that which exists independently of ideas concerning it” (OED).

Unfortunately, in the minds of most people, reality does not count. It is what they believe is reality that counts.

Smart populists, such as rogue politicians, religious gurus, financial fraudsters, psychologists, psychiatrists, psychoanalysts, and many other swindlers, in various domains, have understood this and systematically target their victims’ minds rather than physical reality.

Trump, for example, does not physically rob money from ordinary, hard-working Americans, he simply persuades them to give him their money because he claims he won the 2020 presidential election that was stolen from him. They have faith in him and his motto : “Make America Great Again”.

Reality doesn’t count with them. They don’t want to know about it. It’s what they believe is reality that counts – and reality is what Trump says it is.

The rest is fake news.

.

Dear Indyvidual,

It happened to George Pell, it can happen to anyone, it can also happen to you - and if you purposefully do it to others then it will.

Have we not enough suffering in this world already?

---

Dear Banjo Paterson,

The OED's (current edition) definition of religion is completely flawed, it's a mockery and must have been written by ill-intending people on the outside who look at the religious people like viewing caged animals in a zoo.

Here is a more balanced definition, and while I still have reservations about its accuracy, at least it was written by an insider: http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/religion

" atheism is a set of disbeliefs "

That is a very misleading statement.
True atheists don't concern themselves with intangible hypotheticals.
They follow the truth shown by realities around them.
Truth has no equal, so nothing else matters.
True atheists will sometimes be academically interested in other systems.
But they don't need to compare themselves to any group, especially one whose belief system is based on fear and superstition.
On a normal day, they won't even give any other system a moment's thought.

I don't know why those with religious intent seem to spend so much time trying to panel-beat facts.
Trying to make it appear as if everybody has a religious outlook.
Are they seeking some kind of abstract approval?
Why are they so unsure of themselves?
And why can't they live and let live?
Why the unrest in their thinking?
Is it that their belief system is, perhaps unconsciously, far from satisfying for them?

People commit crimes because they need something they don't have, and usually see no other way of getting it.
Such people must be found and separated from the rest of society.
However, there is no need whatsoever to be cruel to them.
I see many comments which lead me to think that those who wouldst detain are, in reality, far worse than those who would be detained.
The cruel intent surprises me.
Why the need to allow harmful instinctive behaviour to surface?
Should that not be controlled?

.

Cher Ipso Fatso,

.

I wrote :

« Contrary to religion, which is a set of beliefs, atheism is a set of disbeliefs, especially as regards :

• a supreme being or beings
• a human soul »
.

And you commented :

« That is a very misleading statement. True atheists don't concern themselves with intangible hypotheticals. … »
.

I was not being judgmental or expressing a personal opinion, Ipso Fatso, I was simply citing what is generally understood by the term “atheism” as defined in all the reputable English dictionaries :

OED :

1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Cambridge Dictionary :

The fact of not believing in any god or gods, or the belief that no god or gods exist

Merriam-Webster :

1. a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
2. a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods

Collins English Dictionary :

Rejection of belief in God or gods
.

Encyclopaedia Britannica :

Atheism is “the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings”.
.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy :

J. L. Schellenberg says that “in philosophy, the atheist is not just someone who doesn’t accept theism, but more strongly someone who opposes it.” In other words, it is “the denial of theism, the claim that there is no God”.

There is, as has been shown, neither empirical nor a priori knowledge of God, and talk of intuitive knowledge is without logical force.

.

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.

You wrote :

« Here is a more balanced definition [of religion], and while I still have reservations about its accuracy, at least it was written by an insider: http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/religion »
.

Thanks, Yuyutsu, but like you, I too have a number of reservations about the accuracy of that definition. But also like you, I don’t fancy carrying out an in-depth analysis of Noah Webster’s 1828 Congregationalist (Calvinist) definition of the word “religion” here.

As I am sure you have noticed, I usually cite the OED (Oxford English Dictionary) on OLO for the definition of words in the English language.

The OED generally offers a more precise, objective, and universalist definition than all the other English dictionaries.

Wikipedia tells us :

« The Oxford University Press began writing and releasing the Oxford English Dictionary in short fascicles from 1884 onwards. It took nearly 50 years to complete this huge work, and they finally released the complete OED in twelve volumes in 1928.

The OED remains the most comprehensive and trusted English language dictionary to this day, with revisions and updates added by a dedicated team every three months. »

.

Hi BP,

Is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy. Based on Webster and others, it must be a philosophy. In my opinion its a philosophy not a religion. its possible to be a Buddhist and a Christian at the same time.....well maybe.

http://www.thecollector.com/buddhism-philosophy-religion/